• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Sand Springs' AM 1340, KJMU

I came across a listing for KJMU on Radio-Locator.com indicating them as silent (which I knew), and that led to a VERY interesting bit of correspondence on the FCC website from last November.

Birach Broadcasting Corporation filed with the FCC on December 6th indicating they had gone silent November 7th, 2011. The reason?

BECAUSE OF A DISPUTE WITH THE LANDLORD, THE LICENSEE CANNOT ACCESS THE TRANSMITTER SITE AND HAS BEEN FORCED TO TAKE THE STATION OFF THE AIR.

*SNORT* Seriously?!? And the FCC will accept this?

They've filled a "construction permit" to build a tower maybe 100 feet from their current location. More weirdness.

Further research indicates the FCC WILL accept this:

BBC's request states that Station KJMU(AM) went silent on November 7, 2011, due to the loss
of its transmitter site.

BBC's request is granted. Accordingly, Special Temporary Authority is granted to permit Station
KJMU(AM) to remain silent not to exceed 180 days from the date of this letter. Notwithstanding the
grant of this Special Temporary Authority, the broadcast license for Station KJMU(AM) will
automatically expire as a matter of law if broadcast operations do not commence by 12:0 1 a.m.,
November 8, 2012.2

...Boy, I would have loved to be a fly on the wall for THOSE conversations! ;D Anybody know who the "landlord" is? Are the original KTOW owners still tied to that building? When I worked then in the early 90s most of the building was locked off from the studios... and looking through the windows, the rest of the building looked trapped in an early '70s time-warp.

Seems like 1340 was, last time they were on the air, Hispanic programming. Do you suppose BBC is in no hurry to spend the electricity to fire that transmitter back up?

Is there ANYTHING that you think could be put on 1340 and pay the bills? Certainly there are a lot of people in their coverage area of Sand Springs / Prattville / West Tulsa... but would anything on there make enough noise to sell advertising?

They're an unusual signal: half the power at day that they have at night. When I worked there I would have SWORN I saw a construction permit allowing them to go to 900 watts day and night... but my boss didn't seem interested.

Any engineering-types know if the signal could be upgraded either at its current location, or moved more into Tulsa? (Aren't the main stations it protects west of its current location?)
 
Sounds like unpaid bills from a previous owner or operator, and new owner doesn't want to pay them... :-[

I agree Birach needs to get that station out of Sand Springs and closer to Tulsa if he wants to make some money. I dont know why it cant be 1K day and night like most stations at the 1340 frequency. Birach has spent money on upgrading his stations so maybe he will.
 
billyg said:
Sounds like unpaid bills from a previous owner, and new owner doesn't want to pay them... :-[

The quote is not correct and has nothing to do with the situation.

The signal cannot be made better at the current location because the ground system has been reduced by the owners of the land around the tower. The station owner has no control of that land use.

The transmitter site does need to move but it is not an easy nor inexpensive process.
 
Tower Lights said:
The quote is not correct and has nothing to do with the situation.

The signal cannot be made better at the current location because the ground system has been reduced by the owners of the land around the tower. The station owner has no control of that land use.

The transmitter site does need to move but it is not an easy nor inexpensive process.

OK thank you for clearing that up, I was speculating from experience :-\. Hopefully something will be done.
 
...and the construction permit, like I said, moves it a matter of feet.

So, Tower Lights, you're connected somehow to what's going on there?
 
NightAire said:
...and the construction permit, like I said, moves it a matter of feet.

From reading the application on file, they are correcting the coordinates on file and tower/antena height. When the station was moved to this site the tower site coordinates were determined manually by topo map. Today GPS position is much more accurate and many stations are correcting their licenses. This application was filed well before the current landlord dispute occurred.

[/quote]
So, Tower Lights, you're connected somehow to what's going on there?
[/quote]

I have knowledge of the current situation. From your earlier post about the time warp building. The building has been sold by the person who once owned the radio station many years ago. The new landlord has no feelings for the radio station or the FCC, he could care less. He purchased the building for his business operations and it was remodeled for his requirements, it is no longer in a time warp. The current owner of the radio station was not allowed to remove the transmission equipment in the building. The equipment was removed by demolition people scrap style, everything was cut and not at the correct place to make reuse of the connecting cables possible.

Lawyers are involved. Now you know all that I know.
 
Wow... an amazing story. I would think lawyers WOULD be involved... what a mess!

Thanks for your insight. I knew there must have been changes after all these years; I had no idea the station had been evicted.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom